$~123 to 128
*	IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  DELHI  AT  NEW  DELHI

%				                                Date of Decision : 02.04.2026
+ 	W.P.(C) 4343/2026, CM APPL.21142/2026
	GAJENDER						     .....Petitioner
				Through:
				versus
	RYAN INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL & ANR.	   .....Respondents
				Through:
124
+ 	W.P.(C) 4344/2026, CM APPL. 21143/2026
	NARESH KUMAR					.....Petitioner
				Through:
				versus
	RYAN INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL & ANR.	.....Respondents
				Through:
125
+ 	W.P.(C) 4345/2026, CM APPL.21144/2026
	SATPAL SINGH 						.....Petitioner
				Through:
				versus
	RYAN INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL  & ANR.	.....Respondents
				Through:
126
+ 	W.P.(C) 4346/2026, CM APPL.21145/2026
	SATYA PRAKASH					.....Petitioner
				Through:
				versus
	RYAN INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL & ANR.	.....Respondents
				Through:
127
+ 	W.P.(C) 4347/2026, CM APPL.21146/2026
	MUKESH KUMAR					.....Petitioner
				Through:
				versus

	RYAN INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL  & ANR.	.....Respondents
				Through:
128
+ 	W.P.(C) 4348/2026, CM APPL.21147/2026
	MUKESH KUMAR					.....Petitioner
				Through:
				versus
	RYAN INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL  & ANR.	.....Respondents
				Through:

Presence: 	Mr. Anuj Aggarwal, Mr. Anikt Mutreja, Ms. Shivani, Ms. Kritika Matta, Ms. Tanya Rose and Mr. Pradeep Kumar, Advocates for petitioners. 
	
	Ms. Saumya Bajaj, Advocate for respondent no.1. 
	CORAM:
	HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA
				

SACHIN DATTA, J. (Oral)
1. The present petitions have been filed by the petitioners/workman assailing the orders dated 11.03.2026 and 27.03.2026 passed by the POLC-III/Rouse Avenue Courts, New Delhi. 
2. Vide order dated 27.03.2026 inter-alia the right of the petitioners/workmen to cross-examine witness of respondent no.2 [i.e., M2(W1) before the Labour Court] was closed by the Labour Court. The same was done on the basis that the necessary cost as previously imposed vide order dated 11.03.2026, was not paid. 
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that since the services of the petitioners were terminated from their services as far back as in 2018 and that for the last many years the petitioners have been out of job, the cost imposed by the Court resulted in financial hardship which the petitioners were not in a position to bear immediately. However, it is submitted that the petitioners are now agreeable to abide by the directions for payment of cost imposed.
4. It is further submitted that the impugned order dated 27.03.2026 shall cause grave prejudice to the rights of the petitioners to obtain due redressal in the proceedings before the Labour Court. 
5. Considering that the cause of substantive justice should not be allowed to be defeated, also taking note of the fact that the petitioners are now agreeable to pay the cost imposed vide order dated 11.03.2026, the order dated 27.03.2026 to the extent it takes to close the right of the petitioners/workmen to cross-examine M2(W1), is set aside. 
6. Accordingly, the petitioners’ right to cross-examine M2(W1) is restored. The matter shall accordingly be taken up by the concerned Court on an appropriate date. 
7. List for directions before the concerned Labour Court on 06.04.2026. On the said date, the concerned Court shall fix a date for cross-examination by the petitioner of the witness of the respondent/Management. 
8. The present petitions stand disposed of in the above terms. 


APRIL 2, 2026/at						       SACHIN DATTA, J
					
 									



	
W.P.(C) 4343/2026 & Connected Matters	                                                                                      Page 3 of 3